In this document, we will explain what this project is about and how you can successfully implement it into your hiring process.
We aim to change the traditional approach to posting job offers. Moving away from lengthy and abstract lists of requirements, we are moving toward a more defined, accessible, and transparent hiring framework for both companies and candidates.
To achieve this, we have designed the Open Hiring Matrix (OHM), a structured framework that brings clarity, fairness, and consistency to the selection process. This system not only provides a transparent view of the role requirements but also establishes the importance of each skill, allowing candidates to be assessed across a diverse set of competencies: technical, cultural, and interpersonal. The OHM ensures that hiring decisions are based on objective criteria, avoiding misunderstandings and subjective interpretations between candidates and companies.
Using the OHM, candidates gain a clear understanding of the most critical aspects of the role, while companies benefit from a quantifiable system to measure alignment between the candidate’s profile and the position. This approach helps organizations identify and prioritize the most valuable competencies—whether technical experience, interpersonal skills, or cultural fit—offering a balanced and comprehensive assessment of each candidate.
Job descriptions often do not clarify which skills are truly prioritized by the company. Phrases like “Solid knowledge of…,” “Proficiency in…,” “Experience with…” or “3 years of experience in…” tend to be vague and open to multiple interpretations, creating confusion for both candidates and companies. In many cases, the requirements listed and what is genuinely valued in the role do not fully align. For instance, does ‘solid knowledge’ imply more expertise than ‘advanced knowledge’? Or does ‘experience with’ hold more value than ‘strong knowledge’? In some cases, the distinctions seem more straightforward — for example, ‘experience with’ generally implies more than ‘familiarity with,’ right?
In the tech industry, requirement lists can seem endless, and we know that objective evaluation is not always feasible. Beyond technical skills, companies seek interpersonal abilities, global experience, and cultural fit. However, when these expectations are not clearly defined, the selection process can become inconsistent and discouraging.
On the one hand, long requirement lists may discourage candidates, making them uncertain about whether they meet expectations. On the other hand, companies risk missing out on valuable talent due to unclear or imprecise evaluations. This traditional approach does not effectively communicate what is truly essential for the role, potentially leading to misunderstandings that negatively impact both parties. The purpose of OHM is to provide a comprehensive framework that facilitates the identification of required competencies while promoting transparency and openness in the selection process.
We want to align job postings with how we evaluate candidates.
Our goal is to simplify and enhance this process. We want candidates to clearly understand which competencies are most relevant for the role, and for companies to have objective tools to assess candidates fairly and consistently, based on concrete data rather than subjective interpretations.
OHM provides the structure needed to bridge gaps in understanding, ultimately creating more effective, transparent hiring practices.
In a constantly evolving job market, having a clear and equitable approach to hiring processes is essential. The Open Hiring Matrix (OHM) offers as a solution to address the challenges faced by both companies and candidates in their search for talent.
OHM aims to provide:
To conduct an effective assessment within the Open Hiring Matrix (OHM), we will focus on three key components: competence, criterion, and weight.
Defining the components of competence, criterion, and weight creates a standardized assessment framework. This ensures evaluators have clear benchmarks and candidates understand the expectations. To illustrate this framework in action, let’s dive into an example of how the Open Hiring Matrix can be implemented for a software engineering role.
Technical skills involve evaluating the specific knowledge and competencies that enable a candidate to perform tasks or use tools in a particular field, such as programming, design, or systems management.
| Competence | Criterion | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| TECHNICAL SKILLS | 3 | |
| Programming languages | Proficiency in relevant programming languages. | 1 |
| Frameworks and libraries | Proficiency in frameworks and libraries relevant to the role. | 0.5 |
| API Development | Ability to design and build RESTful or GraphQL APIs and understand their integration. | 0.5 |
| Testing and code quality | Familiarity with testing practices such as TDD or BDD. | 1 |
These criteria ensure that the candidate possesses both theoretical knowledge and practical application skills.
Soft skills assess interpersonal and emotional competencies that facilitate communication, collaboration, and relationship management in the workplace.
| Competence | Criterion | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| SOFT SKILLS | 2 | |
| Communication | Ability to express ideas and concepts clearly. | 0.5 |
| Teamwork | Efficiency in collaborating with others and building relationships at work. | 0.5 |
| Adaptability | Flexibility and willingness to learn and adjust to new situations. | 0.5 |
| Problem-solving | Ability to identify, analyze, and solve problems effectively. | 0.5 |
These criteria assess the candidate’s ability to collaborate within a team, learn, and positively impact the work environment.
Experience measures the candidate’s professional background in relation to the position.
| Competence | Criterion | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| EXPERIENCE | 2 | |
| Years of experience | Total years of experience relevant to the position. | 0.3 |
| Relevant projects | Participation in significant projects that demonstrate key skills. | 0.7 |
| Project complexity | The level of difficulty and scope of previous projects (small, medium, or large). | 0.4 |
| Achievements and results | Impact of their work, such as completed projects, increased productivity, reduced errors, etc. | 0.6 |
These criteria determine whether the candidate has the competence and adaptability required for success in the role.
Cultural fit assesses how well the candidate’s values, beliefs, and behaviors align with the organization.
| Competence | Criterion | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| CULTURAL FIT | 2 | |
| Alignment with the company’s core values | Compatibility with the company’s fundamental principles. | 0.5 |
| Commitment to organizational mission and vision | Motivation to contribute to the organization’s goals. | 0.25 |
| Adaptation to methodology and work style | Ability to adapt to the company’s methodologies, such as agile development. | 0.5 |
| Fit with leadership style | Compatibility with the company’s leadership approach (hierarchical, collaborative, etc.). | 0.75 |
These criteria help determine whether the candidate can successfully integrate into the company’s culture.
Cultural Add evaluates how the candidate could bring new perspectives and diversity to the company culture.
| Competence | Criterion | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| CULTURAL ADD | 1 | |
| Diversity of thought and approach | Ability to contribute new approaches, solutions, or ideas. | 0.5 |
| Innovation and new skills | Introduction of technical or methodological skills not currently present in the team. | 0.25 |
| International or multicultural experience | Experience in culturally diverse teams or international markets. | 0.25 |
These criteria measure how the candidate can enhance the company’s culture through diversity, innovation, and unique skills.
Once the evaluation components are defined, we will proceed to assess the candidate based on each established criterion. The following columns will be utilized in the matrix:
∑(S × W)By integrating scores and observations into the evaluation, we not only quantify performance but also provide constructive feedback. This dual approach highlights each candidate’s strengths and identifies areas for development, making the assessment process more comprehensive and transparent.
Now, let’s fully implement the Open Hiring Matrix using a software engineering role as our example.
| Competence | Criterion | Weight | Observations | Score | Total Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Technical Skills | 3 | ||||
| Programming languages | Proficiency in relevant programming languages. | 1 | Strong proficiency in Python and JavaScript. Needs improvement in TypeScript. | 7 | 7 |
| Frameworks and libraries | Proficiency in frameworks and libraries relevant to the role. | 0.5 | Experienced in React and Redux but lacks practical experience in modern state management libraries like Zustand. | 6 | 3 |
| API Development | Ability to design and build RESTful or GraphQL APIs and understand their integration. | 0.5 | Good understanding of RESTful APIs, has built GraphQL APIs but at a beginner level. | 5 | 2.5 |
| Testing and code quality | Familiarity with testing practices such as TDD or BDD. | 1 | Knowledge of TDD but limited real-world experience. Code quality meets acceptable standards. | 5 | 5 |
| Soft Skills | 2 | ||||
| Communication | Ability to express ideas and concepts clearly. | 0.5 | Communicates effectively, clear and concise but needs to work on articulating complex technical concepts. | 8 | 4 |
| Teamwork | Efficiency in collaborating with others and building relationships at work. | 0.5 | Works well in teams, encourages open communication but sometimes dominates discussions. | 7 | 3.5 |
| Adaptability | Flexibility and willingness to learn and adjust to new situations. | 0.5 | Shows flexibility in learning new frameworks, although slow in adapting to significant changes in workflows. | 6 | 3 |
| Problem-solving | Ability to identify, analyze, and solve problems effectively. | 0.5 | Great problem-solving skills but occasionally relies too much on external help for complex issues. | 7 | 3.5 |
| Experience | 3 | ||||
| Years of experience | Total years of experience relevant to the position. | 1 | 5 years of relevant experience, providing a solid foundation for the role. | 8 | 8 |
| Relevant projects | Participation in significant projects that demonstrate key skills. | 1 | Worked on a few large-scale projects but lacking experience with cutting-edge technologies. | 6 | 6 |
| Project complexity | The level of difficulty and scope of previous projects (small, medium, or large). | 0.5 | Handled projects of medium complexity, yet to take the lead on large-scale initiatives. | 6 | 3 |
| Achievements and results | Impact of their work, such as completed projects, increased productivity, reduced errors, etc. | 0.5 | Made a positive impact, improved code efficiency, reduced errors, but few groundbreaking achievements. | 7 | 3.5 |
| Cultural Fit | 2 | ||||
| Alignment with the company’s core values | Compatibility with the company’s fundamental principles. | 0.5 | Strong alignment with the company’s ethical and collaborative values. | 9 | 4.5 |
| Commitment to organizational mission/vision | Motivation to contribute to the organization’s goals. | 0.25 | Expresses enthusiasm for the company’s vision but lacks clear ideas for long-term contributions. | 7 | 1.75 |
| Adaptation to methodology and work style | Ability to adapt to the company’s methodologies, such as agile development. | 0.5 | Understands agile development well, adapts easily to changes in sprints and retrospectives. | 8 | 4 |
| Fit with leadership style | Compatibility with the company’s leadership approach (hierarchical, collaborative, etc.). | 0.75 | Easily adaptable to collaborative leadership styles, enjoys autonomy. | 9 | 6.75 |
| Cultural Add | 1 | ||||
| Diversity of thought and approach | Ability to contribute new approaches, solutions, or ideas. | 0.5 | Demonstrates creative thinking, often suggests alternative approaches to solve issues. | 8 | 4 |
| Innovation and new skills | Introduction of technical or methodological skills not currently present in the team. | 0.25 | Brought in ideas for new work methodologies but hasn’t introduced any groundbreaking skills or technologies yet. | 6 | 1.5 |
| International or multicultural experience | Experience in culturally diverse teams or international markets. | 0.25 | Limited experience in international teams but adaptable to different cultural contexts. | 5 | 1.25 |
The final score for this candidate would be the total sum of all the scores multiplied by their respective weights. In this case, the candidate scored 75.75 out of a possible 100.
For simplicity, we are omitting the breakdown skills of each category. This matrix represents an aggregate view of each candidate’s evaluation across major competency criteria. As we assess different candidates in the selection process, the final score will reflect the weighted sum of their competencies, guiding us in the decision-making process to select the most suitable candidate.
| Candidate | Technical Skills (3) | Soft Skills (2) | Experience (3) | Cultural Fit (2) | Cultural Contribution (1) | Total Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Candidate A | 5 (15) | 8 (16) | 5 (15) | 6 (12) | 8 (8) | 66 |
| Candidate B | 7 (21) | 7 (14) | 7 (21) | 7 (14) | 6 (6) | 76 |
| Candidate C | 6 (18) | 9 (18) | 6 (18) | 8 (16) | 7 (8) | 78 |
| Candidate D | 8 (24) | 6 (12) | 6 (18) | 7 (14) | 6 (6) | 74 |
In this example, Candidate C did not score the highest in Technical Skills (scoring 6), but they significantly outperform in Soft Skills, Cultural Fit, and Cultural Contribution. This balanced profile, with strong interpersonal and cultural strengths, makes Candidate C a more compelling fit for the company’s needs. Their total score of 78 reflects their well-rounded abilities, positioning them as a candidate who could integrate well with the team, even without being the strongest technically.
This scenario shows how modern hiring practices consider a variety of factors, such as communication, adaptability, and cultural alignment. It demonstrates that a candidate can still be a great fit for the team without necessarily excelling in one specific area, particularly when their strengths match what the company values most in its employees.
The OHM is an open-source project, and we encourage companies to adopt and adapt this framework to their specific needs. We also welcome contributions to enhance and expand the OHM to better serve the hiring process.
We are planning to provide a web application that will allow companies to:
We welcome feedback and suggestions for improving OHM. Please share your thoughts and experiences to help us refine and enhance this tool.
The idea, concept, structure, and formulation of this framework were human-created. However, parts of this document were created or translated with the assistance of Chat GPT.